In Re FACEBOOK INTERNET TRACKING LITIGATION
Filing
7
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT in ("Related Actions) filed by Perrin Aikens Davis. (Kiesel, Paul) (Filed on 3/23/2012) Modified on 3/26/2012 (cv, COURT STAFF).
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Paul R. Kiesel, Esq. (SBN 119854)
KIESEL BOUCHER LARSON LLP
8648 Wilshire Boulevard
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
kiesel@kbla.com
Telephone:
(310) 854-4444
Facsimile:
(310)854-0812
David A. Straite, Esq. (admitted pro hac vice)
SIANNI & STRAITE LLP
1201 N. Orange St., Suite 740
Wilmington, DE 19801
dstraite@siannistraite.com
Telephone:
(302) 573-3560
Facsimile:
(302) 358-2975
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
PERRIN AIKENS DAVIS, et al.
10
11
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
12
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
13
SAN JOSE DIVISION
14
15
IN RE: FACEBOOK INTERNET TRACKING
LITIGATION
16
No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT
STATEMENT
17
Date:
Time:
Judge:
Trial Date:
18
19
20
21
22
PERRIN AIKENS DAVIS, PETERSEN
GROSS, DR. BRIAN K. LENTZ,
TOMMASINA IANNUZZI, TRACY SAURO,
JENNIFER SAURO, and LISA SABATO,
Individually and on Behalf of All Others
Similarly Situated,
23
Plaintiffs,
March 30, 2010
1:30 p.m.
Hon. Edward J. Davila
None Set
Case No. 5:11-cv-04834-EJD
Related Case Nos.: 5:11-cv-04935-EJD;
5:12-cv-00370-EJD; and 5:12-cv-00807EJD
In Re Facebook Internet Tracking
Litigation, No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD
24
v.
Action Filed: September 30, 2011
25
26
27
FACEBOOK, INC.,
a Delaware Corporation
Defendant.
28
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
2
LANA BRKIC,
Individually and on Behalf of All Others
Similarly Situated,
3
4
5
Case No. 5:11-04935-EJD
Related Case Nos.: 5:11-cv-04834-EJD;
5:12-cv-00370-EJD; and 5:12-cv-00807EJD
Plaintiff,
v.
In Re Facebook Internet Tracking
Litigation, Case No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD
FACEBOOK, INC., a Delaware Corporation,
and DOES 1-10,
6
Action Filed: October 5, 2011
Defendants.
7
8
JULIAN CARROLL, On Behalf of Himself and
All Others Similarly Situated,
9
10
11
Case No. 5:12-cv-00370-EJD
Related Case Nos.: 5:11-cv-04834EJD; 5:11-cv-04935-EJD; and 5:12-cv00807-EJD
Plaintiff,
v.
Action Filed: January 24, 2012
FACEBOOK, INC., a Delaware Corporation,
12
Defendant.
13
14
15
LAURA MAGUIRE, ET AL., On Behalf of
Himself and All Others Similarly Situated,
16
17
18
19
20
23
24
Related Case Nos.: 5:11-cv-04834EJD; 5:11-cv-04935-EJD; and
5:12-cv-00370-EJD
Plaintiff,
v.
FACEBOOK, INC.,
Action Filed: February 17, 2012
Defendant.
ALEXANDRIA PARRISH, Individually and on
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
Case No. 5:12-cv-00667-EJD
21
22
Case No. 5:12-cv-00807-EJD
In Re Facebook Internet Tracking
Litigation, Case No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD
Plaintiff,
v.
Action Filed: October 7, 2011
Transferred February 8, 2012
FACEBOOK, INC., and DOES 1 Through 10,
Defendants.
25
26
27
28
2.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
SHARON BEATTY, Individually and on
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
Case No. 5:12-cv-00668-EJD
2
In Re Facebook Internet Tracking
Litigation, No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD
Plaintiff,
3
v.
4
FACEBOOK, INC., and DOES 1 Through 10,
Action Filed: October 7, 2011
Transferred February 8, 2012
Defendants.
BROOKE RUTLEDGE, Individually and on
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
Case No. 5:12-cv-00669-EJD
5
6
7
In Re Facebook Internet Tracking
Litigation, No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD
Plaintiff,
8
v.
9
Action Filed: October 12, 2011
Transferred February 8, 2012
FACEBOOK, INC. and DOES 1 through 10,
10
Defendants.
11
12
MICHAEL SINGLEY, Individually and on
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
13
14
15
16
Case No. 5:12-cv-00670-EJD
In Re Facebook Internet Tracking
Litigation, No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD
Plaintiffs,
v.
FACEBOOK, INC.,
DOES 1 THROUGH 10,
Action Filed: October 5, 2011
Transferred February 08, 2012
Defendants.
17
18
DANA HOWARD, individually and on Behalf
of All Others Similarly Situated,
19
Plaintiffs,
20
21
24
27
28
Action Filed: October 4, 2011 and
Transferred on February 8, 2012
FACEBOOK, INC. and DOES 1 through 10,
Defendants.
JOHN GRAHAM, Individually and on
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
Case No. 5:12-cv-00673-EJD
In Re Facebook Internet Tracking
Litigation, No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD
Plaintiff,
25
26
In Re Facebook Internet Tracking
Litigation, No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD
v.
22
23
Case No. 5:12-cv-00671-EJD
v.
FACEBOOK, INC., and DOES 1 Through 10,
Action Filed: October 5, 2011
Transferred February 8, 2012
Defendants.
3.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
DAVID M. HOFFMAN, Individually and on
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
Case No. 5:12-cv-00674-EJD
2
In Re Facebook Internet Tracking
Litigation, No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD
Plaintiff,
3
v.
Action Filed: October 7, 2011
Transferred February 8, 2012
4
6
FACEBOOK, INC. and DOES 1 through 10,
Defendants.
JANET SEAMON, Individually and on Behalf
of All Others Similarly Situated,
7
Plaintiff,
5
8
9
12
FACEBOOK, INC. and DOES 1 through 10,
15
CHANDRA L. THOMPSON, Individually and
on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
In Re Facebook Internet Tracking
Litigation, No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD
FACEBOOK, INC. and DOES 1 through 10,
Action Filed: September 30, 2011
Transferred February 8, 2012
v.
Defendants.
STEPHANIE CAMPBELL, Individually and on
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
18
19
20
23
v.
FACEBOOK, INC. and DOES 1 through 10,
26
27
Action Filed: November 21, 2011
Transferred February 17, 2012
Defendants.
CYNTHIA D. QUINN, Individually and on
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
Case No. 5:12-cv-00797-EJD
In Re Facebook Internet Tracking
Litigation, No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD
Plaintiff,
24
25
Case No. 5:12-cv-00796-EJD
In Re Facebook Internet Tracking
Litigation, No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD
Plaintiff,
21
22
Case No. 5:12-cv-00676-EJD
Plaintiff,
16
17
Action Filed: October 10, 2011
Transferred February 8, 2012
Defendants.
13
14
In Re Facebook Internet Tracking
Litigation, No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD
v.
10
11
Case No. 5:12-cv-00675-EJD
v.
FACEBOOK, INC. and DOES 1 through 10,
Action Filed: October 18, 2011
Transferred February 17, 2012
Defendants.
28
4.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
JEANNE M. WALKER, Individually and on
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
Case No. 5:12-cv-00798-EJD
2
In Re Facebook Internet Tracking
Litigation, No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD
Plaintiff,
3
4
v.
FACEBOOK, INC. and DOES 1 through 10,
5
6
Action Filed: October 20, 2011
Transferred February 17, 2012
Defendants.
JACQUELINE BURDICK, Individually and
on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
Case No. 5:12-cv-00799-EJD
7
In Re Facebook Internet Tracking
Litigation, No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD
Plaintiff,
8
9
v.
Action Filed: October 25, 2011
Transferred February 17, 2012
FACEBOOK, INC. and DOES 1 through 10,
10
Defendants.
11
EDWARD STRAVATO,
12
Plaintiff,
13
14
19
Action Filed: December 14, 2011
Transferred February 17, 2012
FACEBOOK, INC.; JOHN DOE 1-10,
Defendants.
Case No. 5:12-cv-00801-EJD
MATTHEW J. VICKERY, and Other Persons
Similarly Situated,
17
18
In Re Facebook Internet Tracking
Litigation, No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD
v.
15
16
Case No. 5:12-cv-00800-EJD
In Re Facebook Internet Tracking
Litigation, No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD
Plaintiff,
v.
Action Filed: November 14, 2011
Transferred February 17, 2012
FACEBOOK, INC., DOES 1 thru 10,
20
Defendants.
21
22
PATRICK K. MALONEY, Individually and on
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated
23
24
25
Plaintiff,
Case No. 5:12-cv-00824-EJD
In Re Facebook Internet Tracking
Litigation, No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD
v.
Action Filed: January 25, 2012
Transferred February 21, 2012
FACEBOOK, INC., DOES 1 THROUGH 10,
26
Defendants.
27
28
5.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
JOON KHANG, Individually and On
Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated,
Case No. 5:12-cv-00825-EJD
2
In Re Facebook Internet Tracking
Litigation, No. 5:12-md-02314-EJD
Plaintiff,
3
v.
4
FACEBOOK, INC.,
Action Filed: February 1, 2012
Transferred February 21, 2012
5
Defendant.
6
7
8
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
9
The parties in the “Related Actions” (defined below) consolidated into the above-
10
captioned MDL action jointly submit this JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
11
pursuant to the Standing Order for All Judges of the Northern District of California dated July 1,
12
2011 and Civil Local Rule 16-9.
JURISDICTION AND SERVICE
13
1.
14
This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the federal claims asserted in the Related
15
Actions under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 and 1332. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Defendant
16
Facebook, Inc. (“Facebook”) because it is headquartered in the State of California. Venue is
17
proper by agreement under 28 U.S.C. § 1391(b) and through assignment from the Judicial Panel
18
on Multidistrict Litigation. Facebook is the only named Defendant in any of the Related Actions
19
and has been served.1
2.
20
STATEMENT OF FACTS AND FACTUAL DISPUTES
a. Plaintiffs’ Statement of the Facts
21
22
Defendant Facebook operates the world’s largest social networking web site, with more
23
than 800 million users globally, and 150 million users in the United States. Although Facebook
24
members are not required to pay a monetary subscription fee, membership is conditioned upon
25
users providing sensitive personal information to Facebook upon registration, including name,
26
27
28
1
Facebook has not yet been properly served with a summons and complaint in Singley v.
Facebook, Inc., No. 5:12-cv-00670-EJD or Maguire v. Facebook, Inc., No. 5:12-cv-00807-EJD,
but is willing to accept a waiver of service under Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(d) in both cases.
6.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
birth date, gender and email address. More importantly, use of Facebook is conditioned upon the
2
user accepting numerous Facebook cookies on the user’s computer which track browsing history.
3
This information, including the member’s unique Facebook identifier, is then harvested by
4
Facebook from the user’s computer. Facebook uses the information to generate approximately $4
5
billion of revenue annually for the company.
6
7
Facebook installs two types of cookies on members’ computers: session cookies, and
tracking cookies. According to the Electronic Frontier Foundation in San Francisco:
8
9
10
Session cookies are set when you log into Facebook and they include data like
your unique Facebook user ID. They are directly associated with your Facebook
account. When you log out of Facebook, the session cookies are supposed to be
deleted.
11
12
13
14
15
16
Tracking cookies - also known as persistent cookies - don’t expire when you leave
your Facebook account. Facebook sets one tracking cookie known as 'datr' when
you visit Facebook.com, regardless of whether or not you actually have an
account. This cookie sends data back to Facebook every time you make a request
of Facebook.com, such as when you load a page with an embedded Facebook 'like'
button. This tracking takes place regardless of whether you ever interact with a
Facebook 'like' button. In effect, Facebook is getting details of where you go on
the Internet.
19
When you leave Facebook without logging out and then browse the web, you have
both tracking cookies and session cookies. Under those circumstances, Facebook
knows whenever you load a page with embedded content from Facebook (like a
Facebook 'like' button) and also can easily connect that data back to your
individual Facebook profile.
20
Use of Facebook is governed by the Statement of Rights and Responsibilities and a
17
18
21
number of other documents and policies, including a Data Use Policy and a Privacy Policy.
22
Although the governing documents make clear that users consent to Facebook installing cookies
23
24
on the user’s computer, and although the users consent to these cookies tracking and transmitting
25
to Facebook data regarding each user’s web browsing, such consent was limited to internet usage
26
while the user is logged on to Facebook. Users do not consent to having records of their web
27
browsing tracked after logging out of Facebook, because the session cookies were supposed to be
28
6.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
deleted. On Facebook’s online help center, Facebook clearly and unambiguously emphasized,
2
“When you log out of Facebook, we remove the cookies that identify your particular account.”
3
Sometime in 2010, an Australian technology writer, Nik Cubrilovic, discovered that the
4
session cookies Facebook placed on its users’ computers were still active even after users had
5
6
logged off of Facebook. Mr. Cubrilovic warned Facebook of this problem on at least two
7
occasions starting in November, 2010, but Facebook failed to take corrective action and
8
continued to collect data from its millions of active cookies worldwide.
9
Mr. Cubrilovic went public with his research on September 25, 2011. The next day, on
10
September 26, 2011, Facebook publicly admitted that its session cookies continued to remain
11
even after logoff, and agreed to fix the “bug” as the company called it. The next day, the Irish
12
13
Government announced an audit of Facebook under EU privacy rules (Facebook’s primary
14
European data center is in Ireland). Two days letter, U.S. Representatives Edward Markey and
15
Joe Barton, Co-Chairman of the Congressional Bi-Partisan Privacy Caucus, sent a letter to the
16
Federal Trade Commission demanding to know what action the FTC was taking under Section 5
17
of the FTC Act.
18
The following day, on September 29, 2011, the Electronic Privacy Information Center,
19
joined by the American Civil Liberties Union, the American Library Association, the Bill of
20
21
Rights Defense Committee, the Center for Digital Democracy, the Center for Media and
22
Democracy, Consumer Action, Consumer Watchdog, Privacy Activism, and Privacy Times also
23
recommended that the FTC investigate. In their letter to the FTC, the group added that Facebook
24
might not have actually fixed the problem as claimed.
25
26
Finally, despite Facebook’s claim that it fixed the “bug,” researchers are uncovering yet
more methods whereby Facebook is able to track its users even after logout. For example, a
27
researcher at Stanford University has discovered instances in which Facebook was setting
28
7.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
tracking cookies on browsers of people when they visited sites other than Facebook.com. These
2
tracking cookies were being set when individuals visited certain Facebook Connect sites. As a
3
result, people who never interacted with a Facebook.com widget, and who never visited
4
Facebook.com, were still facing tracking by Facebook cookies. The EFF notes in the October 11,
5
6
2011 report that Facebook now can track web browsing history without cookies:
Facebook is able to collect data about your browser – including your IP address
and a range of facts about your browser – without ever installing a cookie. They
can use this data to build a record of every time you load a page with embedded
Facebook content. They keep this data for 90 days and then presumably discard
or otherwise anonymize it. That's a far cry from being able to shield one’s
reading habits from Facebook.
7
8
9
10
11
The Plaintiffs believe that the principal factual issues in dispute include but are not limited to:
(a)
12
13
documents and policies permitted Facebook to track the internet use of its members post-logout;
14
15
Whether or not Defendant Facebook’s Terms of Use and other governing
(b)
Whether or not Defendant Facebook tracked the internet use of its members post-
(c)
Whether or not Facebook members consented to being tracked post-logout;
(d)
Whether or not Facebook members sustained compensable harm under relevant
logout;
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
law as a result of Facebook’s actions;
(e)
The methods by which Facebook tracked the internet use of its members, including
but not limited to session cookies, tracking cookies, tracking pixels, javascript, or other;
(f)
The extent of information tracked and gathered by Facebook from its members;
(g)
Whether the information intercepted by Facebook was “in flight” within the
23
24
25
meaning of relevant statutes;
26
(h)
Whether and to what extent Facebook remedied the problem; and
27
(i)
The extent to which Facebook maintained or is still maintaining data improperly
28
tracked; and
8.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
(j)
Whether Facebook’s post-logout tracking was done knowingly.
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
b. Facebook’s Statement of the Facts
As an initial matter, Facebook believes that Plaintiffs’ argumentative statement of the case
is neither necessary nor appropriate for this case management statement. But since Plaintiffs
insist on including it, Facebook is compelled to respond briefly.
Facebook is a social networking website that enables people to connect and share with
their friends, families, and communities. To join, Users need only provide their name, age,
gender, and a valid e-mail address; they are also informed of Facebook’s Privacy Policy (now
called the “Data Use Policy”), which specifically discloses that Facebook uses cookies for certain
purposes. Once Users register, they create a profile and may begin connecting with other Users
by inviting them to become Facebook “Friends.” Facebook provides a service that hundreds of
millions of people use every day to connect with the people they care about—for free.
Facebook offers Users an array of options for sharing content and communicating with
each other both on Facebook and third-party websites. These options include the Facebook Like
button, which allows Users to click a button associated with some particular content (e.g., a news
article, a video, a blog post, or a video) in order to share or communicate their affinity for that
content with their Facebook Friends.
The main allegations in these cases are based primarily on the September 2011 blog posts
of Australian technology blogger, Nik Cubrilovic and concern Facebook’s alleged use of cookies
to collect browsing history when Users were logged out of their Facebook account. Plaintiffs’
inflammatory claims notwithstanding, the use of cookies is ubiquitous throughout the Internet.
Most interactive websites with any level of meaningful functionality could not operate without
them. Facebook uses cookies for a variety of functions including, for instance, offering features
on other websites (e.g., the Like, Share, and Recommend buttons and other enhancements) and
ensuring the security of the Facebook site and Facebook Users.
These cases involve substantially the same parties, with Facebook named as the sole
defendant in the majority of these cases.
Likewise, the factual allegations, issues of law,
9.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
defenses, and demands for relief are substantially the same across the cases and it is likely that
2
discovery and motion practice will overlap.
3
As Facebook will show, the allegations in these cases do not state any claims, and neither
4
the named Plaintiffs nor the members of the putative class have been harmed by the alleged
5
conduct in any way. Facebook reserves any and all rights, defenses and objections to the facts
6
alleged by the Plaintiffs in these actions
7
3.
8
Plaintiffs contend that the following are the main disputed points of law:
9
10
LEGAL ISSUES
a.
Whether Facebook violated state and/or federal law by tracking the internet
use of its members post-logout; and
11
b.
Whether the theft of personally identifiable information (“PII”) is a
12
compensable injury sufficient to confer standing within Article III of the United States
13
Constitution; and
14
c.
15
16
17
18
Whether the proposed class can be certified under Fed. R. Civ. P. 23.
Facebook denies the allegations in the complaints and denies that the requirements of Fed.
R. Civ. P. 23 can be met in any of the pending cases.
4.
MOTIONS
a.
There have been motions to appear Pro Hac Vice granted by this court. All
19
counsel wishing to appear before this Court and who not yet admitted pro hac propose to make
20
additional motions for admission pro hac as soon as practicable.
21
b.
Defendant Facebook has filed several motions to relate cases. The Court
22
has granted all such motions but for certain pro se cases, which the Court has already ruled
23
unrelated. A list of all current “Related Actions” are listed below in Section 10.
24
25
26
c.
Defendant Facebook has filed a number of motions to extend time. None
are currently pending.
d.
Motion Pursuant to Rule 23(g): Counsel in all Related Actions (except
27
Khang and Carroll) intend to file a joint motion for interim lead of the consolidated MDL on or
28
about Tuesday, March 27, 2012, in advance of the March 30, 2012 CMC. In the Motion for
10.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
Interim Lead, in addition to proposing lead plaintiffs to represent the proposed class, counsel will
2
propose the following leadership structure which recognizes the complex and high-profile nature
3
of this case:
4
i.
An Executive Committee with 2 firms co-leading the action;
5
ii.
A Plaintiff’s Steering Committee with 7 firms to assist co-lead
6
counsel at the direction of co-lead counsel;
7
iii.
8
A special advisory committee consisting of three former State
Attorneys General to advise co-lead counsel; and
9
iv.
10
e.
11
One firm with an office in California to act as Liaison Counsel.
Interim Lead Plaintiffs intend to file a motion for class certification at the
appropriate time during the litigation.
12
f.
13
Facebook will file a response to the Consolidated Amended Complaint
within 60 days of the Complaint’s filing.
14
g.
On February 8, 2012, counsel for Singley filed a Motion to Substitute
15
Plaintiff and Motion to Amend Pleading with the Revised Caption.
16
Facebook has not yet been served with the motion.
17
h.
Facebok may file a motion to stay discovery pending the resolution of any
18
initial motion practice that follows the filing of the Consolidated Amended
19
Complaint under Rule 12(b).
20
i.
21
Plaintiffs and Defendant may also file a motion for summary judgment or
partial summary judgment.
22
5.
23
Within 60 days of interim class counsel assignment, Interim Lead Plaintiffs propose to file
AMENDMENT OF PLEADINGS
24
their consolidated class action complaint.
25
Defendant, but may name additional defendants who are individual directors, employees, agents,
26
or contractors of Facebook as discovery warrants.
Plaintiffs intend to name Facebook as the sole
27
28
11.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
If the Actions go forward after initial motion practice on the sufficiency of the pleadings,
2
Facebook believes that any further amendment to the pleadings should be completed within three
3
(3) months of a decision permitting Plaintiffs’ claims to go forward.
4
6.
5
The parties are aware of and taking reasonable steps to comply with their evidence
6
preservation obligations under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, including the rules governing
7
electronic discovery.
EVIDENCE PRESERVATION
8
Plaintiff Thompson sent a certified spoliation letter to Facebook on October 4, 2011
9
explaining and explicitly itemizing the potentially discoverable material under Defendant’s
10
control. Plaintiffs take the position that Defendant is required to take all necessary measures to
11
ensure that all electronic records pertaining to Plaintiffs and the putative class members are being
12
preserved, as well as all relevant non-electronic records.
13
7.
14
Subject to Facebook’s possible motion to stay discovery referenced in section 4 above, the
15
parties propose that the Rule 26 meet and confer occur within 14 days after the filing of the
16
Amended Consolidated Complaint and that initial disclosures will occur at or within 14 days of
17
the parties’ meet and confer pursuant to Rule 26(a)(1)(C).
DISCLOSURES
18
8.
19
No formal discovery has yet occurred in this action. The parties propose filing a joint
20
DISCOVERY
proposed discovery schedule (to the extent the parties can reach agreement).
21
Subject to Facebook’s possible motion to stay discovery referenced in section 4 above, the
22
parties propose filing the joint proposed discovery schedule promptly after the Rule 26(f)
23
conference discussed in section 7 above.
24
9.
25
Plaintiffs in each and every Related Action bring this action on behalf of themselves and
26
others similarly situated as a class pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 23(b)(3). After this Court’s
27
determination of interim lead plaintiff and counsel pursuant to Rule 23(g), Counsel will propose a
28
class definition in the consolidated class action complaint discussed above.
CLASS ACTION
12.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
Facebook denies that this putative class may be certified under Rule 23.
2
10.
3
There are twenty-one (21) actions related to this MDL either by the Judicial Panel on
4
RELATED CASES
Multidistrict Litigation or by the clerk of the Northern District of California. These cases are:
5
Case Name
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Parrish v. Facebook Inc
Campbell v. Facebook, Inc. et al
Beatty v. Facebook Incorporated
et al
Joon Khang v. Facebook Inc
Carroll v. Facebook, Inc
Davis et al v. Facebook, Inc.
Brkic v. Facebook, Inc
Quinn v. Facebook, Inc. et al
Howard v. Facebook, Inc. et al
Graham v. Facebook, Inc. et al
Hoffman v. Facebook, Inc. et al
Seamon v. Facebook, Inc.
Thompson v. Facebook, Inc.
Rutledge v. Facebook, Inc.
Walker v. Facebook
Maloney v. Facebook, Inc. et al
Burdick et al v. Facebook Inc et al
Stravato v. Facebook, Inc.
Maguire, et al. v. Facebook, Inc.
Vickery v. Facebook, Inc.
Singley v. Facebook, Inc.
Original Court and Case
Number
N.D. Cal. Case Number
ALN/2:11-cv-03576
ARW/5:11-cv-05266
AZ/2:11-cv-01964
5:12-cv-00667-EJD
5:12-cv-00796-EJD
5:12-cv-00668-EJD
CAC/8:12-cv-00161
CAN/3:12-cv-00370
CAN/5:11-cv-04834
CAN/5:11-cv-04935
HI/1:11-cv-00623
ILS/3:11-cv-00895
KS/2:11-cv-02556
KYW/5:11-cv-00166
LAM/3:11-cv-00689
MOW/2:11-cv-04256
MSN/3:11-cv-00133
MT/1:11-cv-00118
OHS/2:12-cv-00078
OKW/5:11-cv-01214
RI/1:11-cv-00624
CAN/5:12-cv-0807
WAW/2:11-cv-01901
TXW/1:11-cv-00874
5:12-cv-00825-EJD
5:12-cv-00370-EJD
5:11-cv-04834-EJD
5:11-cv-04935-EJD
5:12-cv-00797-EJD
5:12-cv-00671-EJD
5:12-cv-00673-EJD
5:12-cv-00674-EJD
5:12-cv-00675-EJD
5:12-cv-00676-EJD
5:12-cv-00669-EJD
5:12-cv-00798-EJD
5:12-cv-00824-EJD
5:12-cv-00799-EJD
5:12-cv-00800-EJD
5:12-cv-00807-EJD
5:12-cv-00801-EJD
5:12-cv-00670-EJD
On March 16, 2012, Facebook filed a Notice of Pending Action pursuant to Local Civil
19
Rule 3-13 with the Court in the MDL Actions to inform the Court of a related case, Ung v.
20
Facebook, Inc., No. 112-cv-217244, now pending in Santa Clara Superior Court. Plaintiffs do
21
not agree at this time that the Ung case is “related” to the instant action.
22
While this Court previously denied Facebook’s motion to relate Knox v. Facebook, Inc.,
23
No. 5:11-cv-05699-EJD, Gayfield v. Facebook, Inc., No. 5:11-cv-05700-EJD, Guyton v.
24
Facebook, Inc., No. 5:11-cv-05701-EJD, Wood v. Facebook, Inc., No. 5:11-cv-05763-EJD, and
25
Valentine v. Facebook, Inc., No. 5:11-cv-05764-EJD (the “Pro Se Cases”)2 to Davis v. Facebook,
26
27
28
2
Additional, nearly-identical pro se cases McClinton v. Facebook, Inc., No. 5:11-cv-06367-EJD,
Thomas v. Facebook, Inc., No. 5:11-cv-06607-EJD, Sanders v. Facebook, Inc., No. 5:11-cv06645-EJD, and Skiles v. Facebook, Inc., No. 5:12-cv-00468-EJD were filed after the Court
13.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
No. 5:11-cv-04834-EJD, Facebook continues to suspect that the plaintiffs in the Pro Se Cases are
2
inartfully pleading the same or similar claims as those in the MDL Actions. If these cases
3
proceed, the need for coordination of discovery and other matters will become increasingly
4
apparent. Accordingly, Facebook believes that, even if the MDL Actions and Pro se Cases are
5
not related, they should be coordinated to promote judicial efficiency and preserve party
6
resources.
7
11.
8
Plaintiffs seek monetary relief in the form of damages including but not limited to actual
9
damages, statutory damages, punitive damages, and attorneys fees. At this time the monetary
10
amount is unknown as both the size of the class and method for calculating the damages is not
11
presently known to Plaintiffs. It can be said, however, that at the time of filing there were over
12
150 million Facebook users in the United States during the proposed Class Period (dates to be
13
defined by interim lead counsel in the forthcoming consolidated class action complaint), and 800
14
million users globally, and the claims for violations of one of the relevant statutes (the Federal
15
Wiretap Act) provides for $100 per day for each day of violation or $10,000, whichever is
16
greater. Plaintiffs also seek injunctive relief.
17
18
RELIEF SOUGHT
Facebook denies that Plaintiffs are entitled to any relief whatsoever.
Additionally,
Facebook reserves all rights, claims, and defenses available under law.
19
12.
20
The parties do not believe that any ADR process is appropriate at this time.
21
13.
22
The parties do not consent to have a magistrate judge conduct all further proceedings.
23
14.
24
The parties (except the Plaintiffs in Maguire) have previously appeared before the Judicial
25
Panel on Multidistrict Litigation in this matter and appear before this transferee court as a result
SETTLEMENT AND ADR
CONSENT TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE
OTHER REFERENCES
26
27
28
denied Facebook’s motion to relate and Facebook consequently did not seek to have them related
to Davis.
14.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
of the order dated February 8, 2012 (MDL No. 2314). The parties do not believe this case is
2
suitable for other reference be it binding arbitration or a special master.
3
15.
4
At this time, the parties do not believe there are any issues that can be narrowed.
5
16.
6
The parties do not believe this case is of the type that can be handled on an expedited
7
NARROWING OF ISSUES
EXPEDITED TRIAL PROCEDURE
basis.
8
17.
9
The parties’ proposal regarding the appropriate timing for Facebook’s response to the
10
SCHEDULING
Consolidated Complaint is discussed in Section 4(f) above.
11
18.
12
The parties propose to meet and confer at the beginning of discovery to propose a trial
13
TRIAL
schedule.
14
19.
15
Interim Lead Plaintiffs and Defendants shall file a Certification of Interested Entities or
16
DISCLOSURE OF NON-PARTY INTERESTED ENTITIES OR PERSONS
Persons within 10 days of the date of the appointment of lead plaintiffs and lead counsel.
17
20.
18
There are no additional matters to add to this joint statement.
19
OTHER MATTERS
Dated: March 23, 2012
COOLEY LLP
20
21
22
23
24
25
/s/ Jeffrey M. Gutkin
Jeffrey M. Gutkin (216083)
(jgutkin@cooley.com)
101 California Street, 5th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-5800
Telephone:
(415) 693-2000
Facsimile:
(415) 693-2222
Attorneys for Defendant FACEBOOK, INC.
26
27
28
15.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
Dated: March 23, 2012
SIANNI & STRAITE LLP
2
3
/s/ David A. Straite
David A. Straite
4
5
6
7
8
9
Barry R. Eichen
Daryl L. Zaslow
EICHEN CRUTCHLOW ZASLOW &
McELROY LLP
40 Ethel Road
Edison, NJ 08817
beichen@njadvocates.com
dzaslow@njadvocates.com
Telephone: (732) 777-0100
Facsimile: (732) 248-8273
10
11
12
13
14
Paul R. Kiesel
KIESEL BOUCHER LARSON LLP
8648 Wilshire Boulevard
Beverly Hills, CA 90211
kiesel@kbla.com
Telephone: (310) 854-4444
Facsimile: (310)854-0812
15
16
Stephen G. Grygiel
John E Keefe, Jr.
Stephen Sullivan, Jr.
KEEFE BARTELS LLP
170 Monmouth Street
Red Bank, NJ 07701
sgrygiel@keefebartels.com
jkeefe@keefebartels.com
ssullivan@keefebartels.com
Telephone:
(732) 224-9400
Facsimile:
(732) 224-9494
Attorneys for Plaintiffs PERRIN AIKENS
DAVIS, PETERSEN GROSS, DR. BRIAN K.
LENTZ, TOMMASINA IANNUZZI, TRACY
SAURO, JENNIFER SAURO, and LISA
SABATO
17
18
19
David A. Straite
Ralph N. Sianni
1201 N. Orange St., Suite 740
Wilmington, DE 19801
dstraite@siannistraite.com
rsianni@siannistraite.com
Telephone:
(302) 573-3560
Facsimile:
(302) 358-2975
Dated: March 23, 2012
WILLOUGHBY DOYLE LLP
20
21
/s/ Conal Fergus Doyle
Conal Fergus Doyle
22
25
433 North Camden Drive, Suite 730
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
conal@willoughbydoyle.com
Telephone: (310) 385-0567
Facsimile: (310) 842-1496
26
Attorney for Plaintiff LANA BRKIC
23
24
27
28
16.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
Dated: March 23, 2012
THE TERRELL LAW GROUP
2
3
/s/ Reginald Terrell
Reginald Terrell
4
Post Office Box 13315, PMB #148
Oakland, CA 94661
reggiet2@aol.com
Telephone: (510)-237-9700
Facsimile: (510)-237-4616
5
6
7
Attorney for Plaintiff JULIAN CARROLL
8
Dated: March 23, 2012
GIRARD GIBBS LLP
9
10
11
/s/ Eric H. Gibbs
Eric H. Gibbs
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
GIRARD GIBBS LLP
DAVID STEIN
ds@girardgibbs.com
ERIC H. GIBBS
ehb@girardgibbs.com
601 California Street, Suite 1400
San Francisco, CA 94108
Telephone: (415) 981-4800
Facsimile: (415) 981-4846
MURPHY, P.A.
WILLIAM H. MURPHY JR.
billy.murphy@murphypa.com
WILLIAM H. MURPHY, III
hassan.murphy@murphypa.com
TONYA OSBORNE BAÑA
tonya.bana@murphypa.com
KAMBON WILLIAMS
kambon.williams@murphypa.com
One South Street, 23rd Floor
LAW OFFICES OF PETER G. ANGELOS Baltimore, MD 21202
PETER G. ANGELOS
Telephone: (410) 539-6500
100 North Charles Street
Facsimile: (410) 539-6599
Baltimore, MD 21202
Telephone: (410) 649-2000
Facsimile: (410) 659-1782
Attorneys for Plaintiffs LAURA MAGUIRE and
CHRISTOPHER SIMON (Plaintiffs in the
Maguire v. Facebook, Inc. action)
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
17.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
Dated: March 23, 2012
BURNS CUNNINGHAM & MACKEY PC
2
3
/s/ William M. Cunningham, Jr.
William M. Cunningham, Jr.
4
Peter S. Mackey
Peter F. Burns
P.O. Box 1583
Mobile, AL 36633
pfburns@bcmlawyers.com
psmackey@bcmlawyers.com
wmcunningham@bcmlawyers.com
Telephone: (251) 432-0612
Facsimile: (251) 432-0625
5
6
7
8
9
Attorney for Plaintiff ALEXANDRIA PARRISH
10
Dated: March 23, 2012
GRANT WOODS PC
11
12
/s/ Grant Woods
Grant Woods
13
14
Two Renaissance Square
40 N. Central Ave., Suite 2250
Phoenix, AZ 85004
gw@grantwoodspc.net
Telephone: (602) 258-2599
Facsimile: (602) 258-5070
15
16
17
Attorney for Plaintiff SHARON BEATTY
18
19
Dated: March 23, 2012
LAW OFFICES OF DAVID SHELTON PLLC
20
21
/s/ David Shelton
David Shelton
22
24
P.O. Box 2541
Oxford, MS 38655
david@davidsheltonpllc.com
Telephone: (662) 281-1212
Facsimile: (662) 281-1312
25
Attorney for Plaintiff BROOKE RUTLEDGE
23
26
27
28
18.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
Dated: March 23, 2012
BISHOP LONDON & DODDS, P.C.
2
3
/s/ Alice London
Alice London
4
3701 Bee Cave Road, Suite 200
Austin, TX 78746
alondon@bishoplondon.com
Telephone: (512) 479-5900
Facsimile: (512) 479-5934
5
6
7
Attorneys for Plaintiff MICHAEL SINGLEY
8
9
Dated: March 23, 2012
GOLDENBERG HELLER ANTOGNOLI &
ROWLAND, P.C.
10
11
12
/s/ Thomas P. Rosenfeld
Thomas P. Rosenfeld (IL 6301406)
16
Mark C. Goldenberg
2227 South State Route 157
P.O. Box 959
Edwardsville, IL 62025
tom@ghalaw.com
mark@ghalaw.com
Telephone: (618) 656-5150
Facsimile: (618) 656-6230
17
Attorneys for Plaintiff DANA HOWARD
13
14
15
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
19.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
Dated: March 23, 2012
BARTIMUS, FRICKLETON, ROBERTSON &
GORNY – LEAWOOD
2
3
/s/ Chip Robertson
Edward D. Robertson, Jr.
4
5
6
7
8
9
Andrew J. Lyskowski
Erik A. Bergmanis
BERGMANIS LAW FIRM, L.L.C.
380 W. Hwy. 54, Suite 201
P.O. Box 229
Camdenton, MO 65020
alyskowski@ozarklawcenter.com
erik@ozarklawcenter.com
Telephone: (573) 346-2111
Facsimile: (573) 346-5885
Stephen M. Gorny
James P. Frickleton
Mary D. Winter
Edward D. Robertson III
11150 Overbrook Road, Suite 200
Leawood, KS 66211
steve@bflawfirm.com
mmarvel@bflawfirm.com
Telephone: (913) 266-2300
Facsimile: (913) 266-2366
10
Attorneys for Plaintiff JOHN GRAHAM
11
Dated: March 23, 2012
BRYANT LAW CENTER, PSC
12
13
18
/s/ Mark P. Bryant
Mark P. Bryant
Emily Ward Roark
601 Washington Street
P.O. Box 1876
Paducah, KY 42002
emily.roark@bryantpsc.com
mark.bryant@bryantpsc.com
Telephone: (270) 442-1422
Facsimile: (270) 443-8788
19
Attorney for Plaintiff DAVID M. HOFFMAN
14
15
16
17
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
20.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
Dated: March 23, 2012
HYMEL, DAVIS & PETERSEN, LLC
2
3
/s/ Michael Reese Davis
Michael Reese Davis
4
L. J. Hymel
Richard P. Ieyoub
Tim P. Hartdegen
10602 Coursey Blvd.
Baton Rouge, LA 70816
rieyoub@hymeldavis.com
ljhymel@hymeldavis.com
mdavis@hymeldavis.com
thartdegen@hymeldavis.com
Telephone: (225) 298-8188
Facsimile: (225) 298-8119
5
6
7
8
9
10
Attorney for Plaintiff JANET SEAMON
11
12
Dated: March 23, 2012
BERGMANIS & MCDUFFEY
Edward D. Robertson, Jr.
Mary Doerhoff Winter
BARTIMUS FRIEKLETON
ROBERTSON & GORNY
715 Swifts Highway
Jefferson City, MO 65109
chiprob@eathlink.net
marywinter@earthlink.net
Telephone: (573) 659-4460
Facsimile: (573) 659-4460
/s/ Andrew S. Lyskowski
Andrew S. Lyskowski
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
380 W. Hwy 54, Suite 201
P.O. Box 229
Camdenton, MO 65020
alyskowski@ozarklawcenter.com
Telephone: (573) 346-2111
Facsimile: (573) 346-5885
Attorney for Plaintiff
CHANDRA L. THOMPSON
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
21.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
Dated: March 23, 2012
BRIAN L. CAMPBELL LAW FIRM, PLLC
/s/ Grant Rahmeyer
Grant Rahmeyer
/s/ Brian Lee Campbell
Brian Lee Campbell
STRONG-GARNER-BAUER, P.C.
415 East Chestnut Expressway
Springfield, MO 65802
Grahmeyer@stronglaw.com
Telephone: (417)-887-4300
Facsimile: (417)-88704385
P.O. Box 189
Pea Ridge, AR 72751
blcampb@hotmail.com
Telephone: (479) 387-1081
Facsimile: (888) 389-5809
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Attorney for Plaintiff STEPHANIE CAMPBELL
Dated: March 23, 2012
BRONSTER HOSHIBATA
10
11
/s/ Robert M. Hatch
Robert M. Hatch
12
16
Margery S. Bronster
1003 Bishop Street, Suite 2300
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
rhatch@bhhawaii.net
mbronster@bhhawaii.net
Telephone: (808) 524-5644
Facsimile: (808) 599-1881
17
Attorney for Plaintiff CYNTHIA D. QUINN
13
14
15
18
Dated: March 23, 2012
ELIZABETH CUNNINGHAM THOMAS PLLC
19
20
/s/ Elizabeth C. Thomas
Elizabeth C. Thomas
21
23
P.O. Box 8946
Missoula, MT 59802
elizthomas@bresnan.net
Telephone: (406)-728-5936
Facsimile: (406)-728-2828
24
Attorney for Plaintiff JEANNE M. WALKER
22
25
26
27
28
22.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
Dated: March 23, 2012
MEYER & LEONARD PLLC
2
3
/s/ Henry A. Meyer, III
Henry A. Meyer, III
4
7
116 E Sheridan, Suite 207
Oklahoma City, OK 73104
hameyer@mac.com
Telephone: (405)-702-9900
Facsimile: (405)-605-8381
8
Attorney for Plaintiff JACQUELINE BURDICK
5
6
9
Dated: March 23, 2012
MANDELL, SCHWARTZ & BOISCLAIR, LTD.
10
/s/ Zachary Mandell ______
Zachary Mandell
11
12
16
Michael S. Schwartz
Mark S. Mandell
1 Park Row
Providence, RI 02903
msmandell@msn.com
mschwartz.ri@gmail.com
Telephone: (401) 273-8330
Facsimile: (401) 751-7830
17
Attorney for Plaintiff EDWARD STRAVATO
13
14
15
18
Dated: March 23, 2012
HILLIS CLARK MARTIN & PETERSON
19
20
/s/ Michael Ramsey Scott
Michael Ramsey Scott
21
25
Louis David Peterson
1221 Second Avenue, Suite 500
Seattle, WA 98101-2925
ldp@hcmp.com
mrs@hcmp.com
Telephone: (206)-623-1745
Facsimile: (206) 623-7789
26
Attorney for Plaintiff MATTHEW J. VICKERY
22
23
24
27
28
23.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
Dated: March 23, 2012
METZ, BAILEY & MCLOUGHLIN
2
3
/s/ Michael J. Ensminger
Michael J. Ensminger
4
Kyle I. Stroh
Michael K. Fultz
33 East Schrock Road
Westerville, OH 43081
mfultz@metzbailey.com
kstroh@metzbailey.com
Telephone: (614)-882-2327
Facsimile: (614)-882-5150
5
6
7
8
9
Attorney for Plaintiff PATRICK K. MALONEY
10
11
Dated: March 23, 2012
GLANCY BINKOW & GOLDBERG LLP
Jon A. Tostrud
TOSTRUD LAW GROUP, P.C.
1901 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 200
Los Angeles, CA 90067
jtostrud@tostrudlaw.com
Telephone: (310) 278-2600
Facsimile: (310) 278-2640
/s/ Marc L. Godino
Marc L. Godino
Lionel Z. Glancy
1801 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 311
Los Angeles, California 90067
mgodino@glancylaw.com
Telephone: (310) 201-9150
Facsimile: (310) 201-9160
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
Attorney for Plaintiff JOON KHANG
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
24.
JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
1
2
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on March 23, 2012, I caused the foregoing to be electronically filed
3 with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing
4 to the e-mail addresses denoted on the Electronic Mail Notice List, and I hereby certify that I
5 caused the foregoing document or paper to be mailed via the United States Postal Service to the
6 non-CM/ECF participants indicated on the Manual Notice List.
7
I certify under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the
8 foregoing is true and correct. Executed on March 23, 2012.
9
10 DATED: March 23, 2012
Respectfully Submitted,
11
KIESEL BOUCHER LARSON LLP
12
13
14
15
16
By:
/s/ Paul R. Kiesel
Paul R. Kiesel
kiesel@kbla.com
8648 Wilshire Boulevard
Beverly Hills, California 90211
Tel.: (310) 854-4444
Fax: (310) 854-0812
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
5:11-CV-04834 –EJD AND ALL CASES IN
5:12-MD-02314-EJD
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?